Hi, On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:14 AM, Alexander Neundorf <neund...@kde.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wednesday 18 May 2016 23:43:12 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > ... >> I have created a survey draft at >> http://survey.kde.org/index.php/858172/lang-en >> >> Now please everybody click through it and give feedback on anything that you >> think should be changed. >> >> Once it feels like we agree on the survey, I'll publish it on the Dot and on >> the kde-community and kde-devel mailing lists, hoping to reach most KDE >> contributors and interested users. > > > here are a few comments: > > > Section "Support for services" > ------------------------------ > - there's a typo "servies" > - the first point says "Focus more in [free services]", the third point says > "Focus on [dominating services]". I would put the "more" also in the third > point. Or maybe for both use "prioritize support for [Free/dominating] > services" ?
One of our historical problems, in my opinion, has been our little engagement with the "commercial world". Words can help or holding us back from turning up side down our current situation. Two examples: I consider the word "support" controversial. Support in commercial environments has a specific meaning. It is related with paid service. I would use a different word. The other word is "product". I understand that Open Source projects, and we are no exception, have a bigger and better "end to end" conscious. That is good. Still, there are several stages of what the commercial world understands as "product cycle" we do not cover. The motivation for creating "products" is also different, so the expected outcome. I would use a different word in the Mission statement. ++ KDE and Qt I think we should try to better reflect the aim that KDE has to become even more relevant in the Qt ecosystem, and how important it is to us. I read two references in the current draft: * "strives to make our products available on all major Free and proprietary operating systems and platforms, for example by applying Qt as a technology that allows easy portability" * "provides frameworks and libraries which facilitate the development of high-quality Qt applications" I would remove both references. The first one is irrelevant. In the same way that we mentioned Qt we could have mentioned any other technology. In a mission statement every word counts. In fact, I think that in general we have too many already. It is not easy, I understand. The second one reduces our scope. I thought we agreed on being a host for different projects. It seems here that if it is not a Qt based app.... I would write instead a sentence that reflects the position within the Qt ecosystem we want to play and how important it is to us. ++ Free vs Open Source I do not like the idea that "Open Source" is the default way for 99% of the world to refer to Free Software. Like most of you, I think it refers to a wider concept. open does not mean free, right? But, specially in commercial environments, that is the current state. I propose to use "Open and Free Software", Free and Open Source Software" or "Libre Software" instead of "Free Software" . I think the above changes would help to reduce our gap with the commercial world.. ++ Participation in key forums There is something missing to me. The Free Qt Foundation has demonstrated to be a key player, we participate in other forums.... How is that reflected in our mission for the coming years? Do we want to improve our positioning? How? Is it important to us? important enough to be reflected in the Mission Statement? Do we participate only to promote Free Software values? ++ "classic desktop" We have suffered the last few years from having two different visions within our community on what desktop means/is. Going through the process of redefining the strategy should serve to solve these kind of fundamental issues. When I read the mission, I understand that we have used a "political way" to provide satisfaction to both views. In that regard, these two points: * aims for a presence on all relevant device classes (desktop, mobile, embedded) * offers a "classic desktop" product which makes the switch from other popular operating systems easy do the job very well. I question though that this is the way to go. We should focus on solving this issue and state the consensus clearly in the Mission Statement instead of perpetuating the problem, leaving our mission, that should lead our main goals for the coming years, unclear. Do we understand desktop as Plasma for a laptop or a PC or is a desktop also Plasma for mobiles and embedded, for instance? Is a desktop an "application" or a "base layer" in a block diagram where apps lay upon? Is it both? At the mission level, what is so relevant (other than our own "issue") that force us to differentiate between a 7"screen from a 32" one in such a way? So my suggestion is to solve this controversy for once and find a single sentence that reflects the agreement. If we cannot reach an agreement, then the mission should reflect the minimum common multiple, not both ideas. Mission statements are about agreements, not a reflection of everybody's ideas. Mission statements are about taking decisions, not about satisfying everybody. Maybe some of you think that this last point has little to do with what it is written or what is happening. If that is the case, it might be only about being a little more accurate, if possible. If that is the case.... 1.- I believe that mobile/desktop convergence is not an emerging trend anymore. 2.- We do an innovative and modern desktop. Even if we do a "classical desktop", we should not state it that way in our mission. The next few years should be about keeping what is good about the "old concept" that took us here and evolving it. We are not dealing with cars from 1920 here. If we have to use quotes in a Mission statement, a document that should be crystal clear not just to ourselves but the "external world"... I would like to finish thanking those who has put so much effort in this document. My job here is easier. Take it as a constructive opinion, please. I tried to be "graphical" in some of my comments. Best Regards -- Agustin Benito (toscalix) KDE eV member Profile: http://es.linkedin.com/in/toscalix _______________________________________________ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community